mobile speed guns

[Softus]

It,s your car, its your speedometer, its your responsibilty to ensure its fit for purpose.

Don't be ridiculous. A standard and unmodified speedometer in a standard and unmodified car is fit for purpose.

Ignorance of its faulty condition, is no excuse in law

You're getting confused with the "ignorance of the law is not a defence in law" mantra, which generally holds true.

If a speedometer becomes faulty, bearing in mind that it isn't examined as part of an MOT test, then it's possible to remain blissfully unaware until a speed camera (or police officer) alerts you of the situation. However, knowing how they work, and knowing that they over-read, I know that this must be a rare occurrence, so in a genuine case it would be reasonable to expect leniency, but not acquittal.

 

[Trazor]

It,s your car, its your speedometer, its your responsibilty to ensure its fit for purpose.

Don't be ridiculous. A standard and unmodified speedometer in a standard and unmodified car is fit for purpose.

Ignorance of its faulty condition, is no excuse in law

You're getting confused with the "ignorance of the law is not a defence in law" mantra, which generally holds true.

If a speedometer becomes faulty, bearing in mind that it isn't examined as part of an MOT test, then it's possible to remain blissfully unaware until a speed camera (or police officer) alerts you of the situation. However, knowing how they work, and knowing that they over-read, I know that this must be a rare occurrence, so in a genuine case it would be reasonable to expect leniency, but not acquittal.

I am not being ridiculous, if it should fail to work correctly, you need to get it fixed, to the point where you can rely on it. Its your responsibilty.

You can not use a faulty speedometer as a defence against speeding.

And no I,m not getting confused with ignorance of the law etc. Thats your assumption.

 

[megawatt]

Whilst it pains me greatly to do so, I must agree with old Softy boy on this one.

Consider the following scenario ...

I'm driving my brand new Honda home from the showroom and, whilst driving round the M25 at 70 mph (speedo), I am pulled by a traffic dibble who clocks me at 80 mph (something more accurate) and I'm subsequently prosecuted.
I know the speedo was displaying 70mph so I take the vehicle back to the dealer and ask them to have it checked out.
They do so, advise that its under reading by 10 mph at 70 mph, and replace it.
I produce the engineers report in court.

I would fully expect the case to be dropped in these circumstances ...These circumstances would IMO be VERY rare though

Courts have quite wide-ranging discretionary powers and use them all the time to deal with the exceptions ... The standard guidelines are applied to the 95% of cases which are straight forward.

I also find myself in agreement with Softus's assessment of the validity of Agile's Chinese fairy story.

Agile wrote:

These are people who I know personally! So no web link.

Softus replied:

If they've got any sense they'll also move without leaving a forwarding address.

You crack me up sometimes Softus.

MW

 

[Trazor]

I would fully expect the case to be dropped in these circumstances ...These circumstances would IMO be VERY rare though

So rare, I would bet its never happened................

You are now driving your brand new Honda home from the showroom, its now dark. The police pull you over for having a rear light out....Now what will you say............

 

[megawatt]

Not the same thing really Trazor as there are parts of a car you are expected to check before driving to ensure are in correct working order ... Lights, wipers, washers, tyres etc ... These are considered to be drivers responsibilities for the safe operation of the vehicle and the requirement is enshrined in the Highway code and (I'm guessing) also the road traffic act.

You are not reasonably expected to know whether components such as your speedo are accurate ... Note I said ACCURATE ... If it wasn't working at all you'd have a hard time justifying the previous scenario

In answer to your question I'd say ... "Oh is it officer, I hadn't noticed, what a diligent officer you are ... Thank you sooooo much for pointing it out to me, I'll drive straight to the nearest garage and purchase a new one" ... Then I'd offer to buy a ticket to the Policeman's ball ... Which (as Norman Stanley Fletcher would say) will hopefully turn out to be a raffle not a dance

MW

 

[noseall]

listen to MW and take heed. he is an expert at speeding, does it every day and is proud of the fact.

 

[Softus]

I am not being ridiculous, if it should fail to work correctly, you need to get it fixed, to the point where you can rely on it. Its your responsibilty.

I agree that it's the owner/driver's responsibility, but how many speedometers have you seen fail in such a way as to make them inaccurate, and how would you notice?

You can not use a faulty speedometer as a defence against speeding.

I haven't implied anything that conflicts with that statement. All I said was that it's reasonable to fail to know that a speedometer is under-reading, and so to be speeding unwittingly, and therefore it's reasonable for that to be included in a statement of mitigation.

It doesn't change the fact that the offence occurred, but it ought to result in a more lenient penalty than that given to someone who was gratuitously and knowingly speeding.

And no I,m not getting confused with ignorance of the law etc. Thats your assumption.

Ignorance of being confused is not a valid defence against an accusation of being confused.

Since your behaviour is consistent with that of someone who is confused, I continue to assert that you are indeed confused.

 

[megawatt]

Listen to MW and take heed. he is an expert at speeding, does it every day and is proud of the fact.

I've always wanted to be notorious

 

[noseall]

I've always wanted to be notorious

most criminals do. 'tis the 'glamourus' side of law breaking. ha ha.

 

[Trazor]

Its your ignorance

Ignorance of being confused is not a valid defence against an accusation of being confused.

Your conviction of my confusion, is merely a symptom of indefensible delusion.

 

[breezer]

softus always takes the P or throws insults, BUT i too have to agree with the new speedo new car Thing by softus, I did point out there was a case in the paper where just such a thing happened

 

[foxhole]

Hand held guns are pretty poor, they pick up the largest object, so point at a car in front of a lorry and it will pick up the lorry.My brother [ex copper] never got a conviction using them, and never wanted too as they were known to be unreliable.

 

[GasMan1965]

Your car must have a speedo correct within 10%.

Not quite true, manufacturers calibrate speedometers at up to 10% above the true speed, never below.

You can not blame your speedometer, if you are caught speeding.
Anyone with Sat/Nav will see their true speed displayed, which will always be higher than your speedometer.

Do you mean always lower than ya speedo

 

[tim west]

Do you mean always lower than ya speedo

Anyone with Sat/Nav will see their true speed displayed, which will always be higher than your speedometer.

The speed displayed on my satnav is lower than that shown on my car's speedometer.

Yes, you are absolutely right, I must learn to proof read my own posts.

 

[GasMan1965]

He was right though,, my sat nag ,, oops sorry thats the wife, I mean sat nav is always about 6 mph lower than any vehicle I put it in ..